Author
Topic: Today In The News

To add to the stuff you posted later, this also conveniently allows them to censor many other sites that they don't like because someone may upload something they deem offensive.

This strikes me as an excellent point; if the law is broad enough to allow for that it can open some pretty large floodgates. Mind you, I don't know enough about British politics to comment in any kind of detail on the likelihood of them abusing that power, but generally speaking a government will be...welll...a government.

Worst of all it's not even a case of even if you opt out you aren't affected. He plans to make looking at "extreme" pornography illegal, which includes BDSM. My anger isn't even about him trying to ban porn or throwing in the old "I'm doing it for the good of the children" routine, but this is censorship so blatant I don't know why people aren't rioting.

Star, how would you rate your bullshit as opposed to this gem?

Vic Toews Canadian Public Safety Minister said on February 13, 2012: ".. either stand with us or with the child pornographers" in response to questions from Quebec MP Francis Scarpaleggia regarding extensive Privacy Commission concerns about 'warrant-less access' to all Canadian Internet and Cell phone accounts under the proposed legislation contained in bill C-30 "Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act" introduced the following day (February 14, 2012) in the House of Commons of Canada.

Measures to block access to content on the internet never work out the way those in power tend to think they will. Not only does it just encourage the seekers of the content to find ways around the blocks, but such provisions tend to be aggressive, in that they block legitimate, non-pornographic information. Classic example is safe-sex information; despite the fact that such information is for the good of the public, the fact that it deals with sexual content causes it to be blocked. Information dealing with homosexuality also tends to be blocked, since it often gets lumped in with other "adult" content.

I don't even think pedophiles USE Google. That seems like asking to be caught. I thought it was all be peer-network stuff, or you know a guy who knows a guy.

Terrorists don't tend to use sites and message boards that show up on Google either (or search for compatriots on Google), or their personal cell phones for that matter, and yet that's the excuse the US government has given for collecting internet and phone data on everyone in the country.

I'd say the common sense answer is that these operations have fuck-all to do with catching terrorists or catching pedophiles when it comes right down to it. It's just an excuse that the public is expected to be willing to swallow.